Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
COMPOSITIONS OF MULTIMERIC PROFILIN FOR DIAGNOSIS AND
TREATMENT OF ALLERGIES
Inventor: Michael Babich
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application 60/272,149
filed February 28, 2001.
Multimers of plant profilin are a preferred form for diagnosis and treatment
of
allergies. Natural and synthetic whole molecules or fragments that are
functional
equivalents of the multimers are used 1) as hyposensitizing agents for
treatment for
allergies; and 2) diagnostic agents for screening patients to determine
profilin
allergenicity.
Profilins are cytosl~eletal proteins expressed in all eukaryotic cells that
sequester G-actin and bind to membrane-associated phosphatidylinositol-4,5
bisphosphate (Carlsson et x1.,1976; Theriot and Mitchison, 1993; Sohn and
Goldschmidt-Clennont, 1994; Goldschmidt-Clermont and Janmey, 1991; Baalout,
1996; Lassing and Lindberg, 1985; Valenta et x1.,1993), thereby affecting both
cell
morphology and signal transduction. Profilins have been identified and
purified from
multiple sources (e.g., human cells, tree, grass, weed pollens) and have been
produced
by recombinant DNA technology (Valenta et al., 1992x, b; Vrtala et al., 1996x,
b;
Susani, 1995; Pauli et al., 1996; Kwitalcowslci and Bruns, 1988; Honore et
al., 1993).
The existence of human profilin multimers (i.e., profilin self associations)
was
first reported by Babich et al. (1996) in which tetramers (complexes of four
profilin
molecules interconnected; to form profilin4) were identified as the relevant
high-
affinity actin-binding form. Immunoblots, capillary zone electrophoresis and
sodium
dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide geI electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) analyses were
interpreted to show that human profilin monomers of approximately 14.8 kDa
molecular weight form multimers comprised mostly of dimers (profilin2) and
tetramers. Furthermore, functional significance was inferred by actin
preferentially
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
2
binding to the tetrameric form of profilin. Subsequently, another study showed
that
profilins from birch, human, and yeast self associate (Mitterman, et al.,
1998), but
neither function nor clinical significance was addressed.
There is a wide range of homology (~40-99%) among the various profilin
monomers identified from humans, plants, and animals. Structural analysis has
been
reported that revealed remarlcable homology between profilins from different
plant
species (Valenta et al., 1992; Vrlala et al., 1996). However, plant profilins
appear to
share common antibody recognition sites (epitopes); specifically, profilin-
sensitive
allergy patient IgE antibodies cross-react with different profilins. In
addition, rabbit
polyclonal antibodies raised against recombinant birch profilin (Valenta and
Kraft,
1995) cross-react with virtually all plant profilins reported. The available
data
indicate that profilin from one plant source can cross-sensitize an individual
to several
plant species and may explain why some patients with Type I hypersensitivities
display reactions to a wide range of distantly related pollens and foods.
An estimated 44 million patients (from North America, Europe, and Japan)
suffer from Type I allergies to profilin which is found in plants, animals,
and
substances such as latex. Type I allergy symptoms include hay fever, runny
nose,
itching, wheezing and stein reactions, as well as the highly publicized fatal
reactions to
microscopic amounts of peanut. Type I allergies are also associated with the
development of asthma. Thus, any aspects that are unique to profilin may, in
turn,
provide a basis for further study and development of allergy diagnosis and
treatment.
European studies have reported that profilin isoforms isolated from various
plant sources may act as generic-, or pan-allergens (Valenta et al., 1992a, b;
1991;
Valenta and Kraft, 1995) and that approximately 20% of all pollen-allergic
patients
(with Type I allergies) display IgE reactivity to recombinant birch profilin
(Valenta et
al., 1992a, b; 1991; Valenta and Kraft 1995). A recombinant birch profilin, as
well as
natural profilins from birch, timothy grass and mugwort, are able to elicit
IgE-
mediated histamine release from basophils of pollen-allergic patients. A study
of the
North American population by the present inventor (Psaradellis et al., 2000)
also
demonstrated sensitivity of allergic patients to profilin. Thus, profilin may
be a pan-
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
3
allergen as well as being responsible for the sensitization and maintenance of
a
significant number of Type I allergic patients.
As discussed and cited in the worlc reporting discovery of human profilin
multimeric forms (Babich, et al., 1996), investigators had not considered the
existence
of profilin multimers to have any relevance, even to the extent that they were
often
dismissed as extraneous proteins. Previous investigators were either unaware
that
plant profilin multimers existed, or did not address the issue of profilin
multimers as
an allergenic form. However, little is known regarding the biological
importance of
protein aggregation/self association. The phenomenon is generally thought of
as a
biochemical attraction that takes place in which a biological role, if any,
remains
elusive. Even if a biological role is discovered, a clinical role does not
necessarily
become obvious. For example, in the allergy field, there are no specific
multimeric
proteins being used to date for hyposensitization shots to set a precedent for
the
present application.
Overall, very few specific allergens have been identified; therefore
identification of specific allergenic forms of profilin would be clinically
useful.
Consequently, few compositions are available for injection of a purified,
specific
causative allergy agent to induce hyposensitization. Most medication is
directed
towards treating allergy symptoms, but not the cause. Vaccination is the only
treatment which is closest to curative; it is able to change the immune-system
reaction
pattern, stopping symptoms and, in certain patients, preventing the escalation
of hay
fever to asthma. Vaccines are used as hyposensitizing agents to convert the
type of
immunoglobulin/antibody response of the patient from IgE to predominantly IgG
(also referred to as "sero-conversion"). IgE is the common response of the
patients to
clear their bodies of the allergen, but it also evokes side effects that are
the commonly
known allergy symptoms (e.g., runny nose, wheezing lungs, itchy eyes, skin
rash,
nausea), whereas IgG can help remove the allergen without such side effects.
Successful hyposensitization vaccines thus render an IgG response that is
minor
compared to the elevated IgE levels against a given allergen.
Allergy vaccination treatments to date mostly consist of injection of a
cocktail
of extracts from allergenic substances, such as grass pollen, to which the
patient is
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
4
allergic. Cocl~tails are used because very few specific allergens are
identified. By
gradually increasing the dosage, the patient's immune response will change and
the
patient will eventually no longer show an allergic reaction to the allergens
via sero-
conversion. The availability of such compositions thereby improves treatment,
but a
more specific allergen (rather than cocktail) would be more effective,
reproducibly
prepared, and generally have less side effects.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
An aspect of the present invention is identification of profilin multimers as
an
allergenic form. .
With regard to allergenicity, larger antigens such as multimers could present
additional epitopes to elicit a greater IgE-mediated histamine release. This
possibility
was explored leading to the present invention, aspects of which include 1)
that plant
profilin forms multimers; and 2) multimeric forms are more allergenic than
monomers. Recombinant plant profilin multimerization was studied and
iimnunoassays were developed to assess IgE reactivity of individuals to plant
profilin.
The correlation between Type I hypersensitivities and reactivity to plant
profilin
within a population was examined in the U.S. (Illinois) and found to support
the idea
that profilin is a pan allergen in 20-30% of patients. Therefore, diagnostic
and
therapeutic uses of profilin multimers will have significant clinical impact.
The invention relates methods and compositions to hyposensitize a mammal.
The compositions include production and/or purification of naturally
occurring,
synthetic, or recombinantly produced profilin (sources of monomers are listed
in
Table 3), which yields multimeric forms. The methods include the steps of
(a) -.. obtaining an immunogenic composition comprising multimeric
profilin; and
(b) administering an effective dose of the composition successively in
incremental doses until the mammal is hyposensitized.
The invention also relates utilizing multimeric profilin compositions for
diagnostic means by immunoassays such as:
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
(a) administering an effective dose of compositions comprising multimeric
profilin via established RAST (radio-allergosorbent test) or any skin tests
known to those of skill in the art to diagnose patient sensitivity to
profilin; and
(b) applying said composition in a tissue, blood, serum or plasma assay
5 (e.g., enzyme-linlced immunosorbant assay/ELISA; radioimmunoassay/RIA;
immuno-radiometric assay/IRMA; R.AST; luminescence immunoassay/LIA;
magnetic allergoabsorbent test/MAT) to detect patient reactivity against
profilin.
The profilin multimers may be in the form of a natural or synthetic peptide or
polypeptide, or made by recombinant methods. The compositions may include
pharmaceutically acceptable carriers or diluents known to those of skill in
the art.
Administration may be via parenteral, oral, nasal, inhalant or rectal routes.
Treatment
dosage is the amount which is sufficient to produce clinical effectiveness as
measured
by reduced IgE-related symptoms; diagnostic dosage is the amount which is
sufficient
to produce a measurable reaction in the respective procedure (e.g., skin tests
=
irritations; biological assay = detection of patient IgE binding to profilin).
Given that 1) 20-30% of Type I allergy patients have IgE that reacts with
profilin; and 2) the present discovery of allergenic profilin multimers, then
profilin
multimers or congeners thereof (i.e., something closely resembling multimeric
profilin or analogous to it) are important for diagnostic and vaccine
treatment of these
allergy types.
In agreement with profilin sizes determined from other sources (e.g., human,
birch pollen) silver-strained SDS-PAGE gels and immunoblot analyses revealed
that a
significant 14.8 kDa protein was purified from Esche~iclaia coli transformed
with the
cDNA of a plant (Zea mat's) profilin isoform (ZmPROl). Higher molecular weight
proteins (particularly 60 kDa and 30 kDa) were also observed, which became
predominant and larger (> 90 lcDa) in the absence of reducing agents. Human
IgE
reactivity to profilin was measured by enzyme linked immunosorbant assay
(ELISA)
that was developed using patient serum samples classified as either negative
(no Type
I allergies), positive (Type 1 plant allergies) or miscellaneous (i.e.
allergies other than
classical Type I plant allergies). The IgE-ZmPR01 complexes were seen in three
of
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
6
nine patients with Type I plant allergies, compared with one of eight negative
controls
and three of 14 from the miscellaneous category. Dot filtration immunoblots
were
subsequently developed to absorb prof lin diluted in the presence or absence
of
reducing agent to yield mostly monomeric or multimeric profilin, respectively.
Immunoglobulin E from positive patients displayed a greater intensity of
binding to
ZmPROl under conditions that favored profilin multimers. In summary,
recombinant
ZmPR01 profilin forms multimers and is suitable for a developed ELISA.
Profilin
has pan-allergenic potential, and profilin multimers have greater
immunogenicity than
monomers.
The combination of near-capacity protein loading and a relatively more
sensitive SDS-PAGE staining procedure to identify the additional protein
bands,
compared with typical reports with Coomassie blue protein staiung, may account
for
identifying multimer forms. In addition, plant and human profilin may be
similar in
their ability to resist chemical reduction. Computer-based molecular modeling
of
human profilin suggested a profilin-profilin interaction might occur that
protects some
of the disulfide bonds from harsh reducing agents (FIG. 5).
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
FIG. 1 shows a photograph of silver-stained SDS-PAGE separation of
Esclae~ichia coli transformed with Zea nays Zm PRO1 cDNA; the protein encoded
by
ZmPR01 cDNA was purified by affinity bead slurry separation as described in
the
Materials and Methods; lane 1, non-transformed E. coli (negative control);
lane 2, E.
coli containing the pET23a/ZmPR01 vector; lane 3, E. coli containing the
pET2,3a/ZmPROl vector + IPTG to induce expression of the profilin protein;
arrows
show monomeric profilin; protein molecular weight marker migrations are listed
on
the right (in kDa).
FIG. 2 shows a photograph of an affinity column purified Zea mays Zm PRO1
from transformed Escherichia coli; (a) results are similar to silver-stained
SDS-PAGE
in FIG. 1, but profilin is separated by affinity column chromatography as
described
herein in the Materials and Methods; lane 1, under reducing conditions (+(3-
mercaptoethanol (BME); arrow depicts location of monomeric profilin; lane 2,
under
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
7
non-reducing conditions (-BME); (b) corresponding immunoblot of samples run in
parallel with (a) lane 3, + BME; lane 4, - BME; rabbit anti-ZmPR01 and
horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated secondary goat anti-rabbit IgG method was used to
visualize
immunologically distinct profilin proteins; protein molecular weight marker
migrations are listed on the left (in kDa).
FIG. 3 shows a photograph of wells from an enzyme-linked immunosorbant
assay developed for plant profilin; wells 1-2, using secondary antibody alone;
wells 3-
4, using primary antibody + secondary antibody; wells 5-6, using primary
antibody +
secondary antibody + Zea rnays Zm PROl profilin; tris-buffered saline + ZmPR01
profilin (i. e. negative control) gave no measurable optical density (not
shown).
FIG. 4 shows a dot-filtration immunoblot of Zea mays ZmPR01 profilin and
human IgE. Profilin was adsorbed and filtered onto a dot-filtration apparatus
under
conditions that favor either monomers [+ (3-mercaptoethanol (BME)] or
multimers (-
BME), prior to addition of serum from patients declaring allergies [serum (+)]
or
without allergies [serum (-)]; control, rabbit anti-ZmPR01 antibody (positive
control);
triplicate well determinations of the colorimetric assay are shown for all
samples
(background, -BME + profilin + secondary antibody + metal diaminobenzidine
substrate; the baclcground was no different when + BME was included);
quantitative
values (mean ~ SEM) for the intensity of darkness were calculated as described
herein
in the Material and Methods and are presented next to each row; student's t-
test
revealed significance levels of *P < 0.05 or **P < 0.01 for -BME versus
corresponding +BME rows consisting of a protein with am amino acid sequence.
FIG. 5 shows computer-based molecular analysis of profilin self association.
The structure of crystalline profilin human profilin I (Metzler et al., 1995)
was
downloaded onto a computer for molecular modeling and analyses of the "best
fit" to
for dimerization. Software to analyze profilin structures included: QUANTA
(the
core program; Molecular modeling, graphics and manipulation for quality
graphics
and stereochemical insight), CHARMm (Chemistry at Harvard Molecular modeling;
via the Karplus laboratory at Harvard, MA) for multiple physical chemistry
manipulations (e.g., interactions, reactions, free energy calculations, energy
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
8
minimization, etc.); UHBD (University of Houston Brownian Dynamics suite of
programs from the McCammon laboratory) for Poisson-Boltzmann calculations,
Brownian dynamics, pKa, enzyme-substrate interactions; UHBDINT to interface
QUANTA with UHBD; QPROTN, for protein modeling system to predict 3-D
structures from primary amino acid sequences using homology modeling; search
and
retrieve 3-D crystal structures of homologous sequences to the target sequence
and
construct models based on such structures. A high probability form of profilin
self
association is shown in FIG. 5 Key:
re = represents structures of two human profilin I molecules that constitute
the dimer, each containing the following:
White = actin binding domains
Black = cysteine residues with associated sulphur groups
Among the possible sulphydryl bonding between the three integral cysteines
(amino
acid postion numbers 16, 70, 127) numbers 16 and 127, each from a different
protein
moiety (the two mostly grey interconnected structures), were nearby and
available in
a conducive steric fit to form two disulfide bridges (S-S bonds) between the
twin
molecules (arrow pointing to the black interconnected molecules). Three
dimensional
conformation also revealed a relatively protective pocket surrounding the S-S
bonds.
A near 90 degree turn is observed between the two profilins with the actin
binding
domains and cysteine #70 accessible (e.g., can be seen as the black exposed
molecule
on the right profilin moiety). Unique regions that occur as a consequence of
profilin-
profilin binding (shown between the brackets) represent putative epitopes for
allergic/IgE reactions, and therefore have amino acid sequences that can be
used to
develop novel peptides for the treatment and diagnosis of profilin-related
type I
allergies.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
Allergy patients' IgE has been shown to cross react among profilins from
different sources. The present invention is directed to profilins that are
related to
allergens which exist in a variety of plant species (trees, grass, weeds),
foods such as
peanut, and to the profilins found in humans. A novel aspect of the invention
is that
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
9
profilin multimers are the preferred, if not the exclusive, allergenic form.
The size of
the multimeric is greater than the monomeric form, including those wherein
multiples
of a monomer (approximately 14 kDa) could range in size at or between 2~, 36,
and
60 lcDa, or those multimers above 100 kDa as described for the SDS-PAGE gels
of
FIGS. l and 2. The multimers may arise from self association of profilin with
the
same identity (homomultimers), or may arise from cross-association between
profilins
(heteromultimers). An example of heteromultimers would be where the family of
corn pollen profilins bind each other to form multimers; another example would
be
cross species heteromultimers (e.g., corn-birch pollen profilin complexes).
Although
heteromultimers have not been detected, conceivably a unique sequence may be
identified from such heteromultimers that is ultimately the most potent and
generically applicable form for treatment and/or diagnosis of profilin-
sensitive type I
allergies.
Profilin multimers may be made by methods known to those skilled in the art:
e.g. by purification from their original sources in nature, by chemical
synthesis, or
recombinant DNA technology. The profilin or profilin peptides and fragments
are
subsequently purified by common affinity chromatography methods using poly-1-
proline (Babich, et al., 1996; Janmey, 1991) or HPLC (high performance liquid
chromatography). The term "synthetic" used herein includes all peptides and
polypeptides produced by cloning and expression of the nucleotide sequences
(Psaradellis, et al., 2000; Sambroolc and Russell, 2001) or by commercially
available
chemical s5mthesis based upon the encoded nucleotide sequences, or a
specifically
designed amino acid sequence derived from known profilin amino acid sequences.
In addition to making whole profilin molecules that multimerize, synthetic
peptides may also have the following requirements to make novel profilin-based
peptides and polypeptides for therapy and diagnostics: 7-21 amino acids in
length,
contain at least one proline, and contain at least one acidic amino acid. The
requirements are derived from a collective prediction from each of the
following: 1) a
minimum size that can be made efficiently, is sufficient for immune
recognition, yet
small enough to reduce potential side effects compared to larger molecules; 2)
bends
that occur within and among profilins upon multimerization can be mimiclced in
the
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
peptides by proline; 3) charged amino acids for water solubility and
potentially
facilitate antibody-peptide interactions; 4) a plausible multimeric structure
for profilin
multimers was deduced from computer modeling (FIG. 5) which is consistent with
a
role for prolines and charged residues on the outside. Therefore, a person
with IgE
5 most likely would produce antibodies against the exposed portion of profilin
complexes that result from multimerization or to a portion of the amino acid
sequence
from one profilin molecule that continues the sequence from the adjoining
additional
profilin molecule shown in the FIG. 5.
Table 3 shows the sequences of profilins with allergic potential. The
10 sequences form the basis to develop multimeric profilins and, given the
previously
described parameters, to make peptide fragments for allergy treatment and
diagnoses
The ability of plant profilin to form clinically relevant multimers from human
and a variety of plant species is a novel aspect of the present invention. The
biochemical data and computer-based modeling were in agreement that profilin
from
various species can form multimers. Furthermore, the data from FIG. 5 show
that
profilin forms multimers that remain strongly attached due to strong chemical
bonds
(sulphydryl bonds) that are relatively protected from harsh reducing agents
(which
normally break such bonds), and the chemical free energy (favorable state) for
two
profilin molecules is to self associate. Thus, the nature for two profilin
molecules is
to self associate, which would explain why profilin multimers exist along with
monomers.
As discussed under Background of the Invention, multimers were previously
either unobserved, dismissed as contaminants, or not studied for clinical
relevance.
Two other reasons become apparent from the results (1) the lack of rabbit anti-
plant
profilin IgG to recoguze human profilin (which forms multimers) could be
construed
as evidence that plant multimers do not exist because if the antibodies
recognized
human profilin multimers then it could have pointed investigators to look for
plant
profilin multimers; and (2) a more sensitive stain was used to detect proteins
in the
present SDS-PAGE experiments. For example, Coomassie blue was a preferred
stain
used by others to detect proteins with minimal background, thereby rendering a
"cleaner" gel and preferentially detecting the most abundant proteins loaded
onto the
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
11
gel. In contrast, silver staining used herein is more sensitive and picks up
background
proteins. The gels are rather dark and protein bands are sometimes blended in
with
many other proteins that are close in size, in addition to producing a darker
background (e.g., FIGS. 1 and 2). Thus, much of the published work in this
area
shows Coomassie blue stained gels, which could explain, in part, why the
multimers
were previously not evident or noted.
Indeed, established methods of profilin isolation have often yielded
extraneous
and unidentified proteins (discussed in Babich, et al., 1996) that are z2
times the
recognized size of the 12-15 kDa cytoskeletal molecule. These bands were
dismissed
as contaminations, rather than sought as dimers or other profilin multimers.
Furthermore, profilin used in allergy studies was purified or synthesized
without
determining the composition (mono-multimer) when testing for allergenicity.
For
instance, other investigators only focused on an assumed profilin monomer as a
product for the diagnosis and therapy of allergic diseases to the extent that
the very
size of profilin monomers (14 lcDa) has been used to name (P14) the patented
product
(Valenta, et al., 1996; US Patent 5,583,046 and US Patent 5,648,242). In
contrast, as
discussed in Psaradellis et al., 2000 and shown in FIG. 4, profilin multimers
are
proposed as the preferred, if not exclusive, allergenic form.
Clinical relevance for profilin multimers was obtained by an assay that
demonstrated preferential binding of IgE from humans with Type I allergies.
Larger
profilin multimers were more allergenic due to their size and novel antigenic
presentation to a susceptible human, thereby inducing an allergic reaction
mediated by
IgE. Use of this multimeric property of profilin includes: 1) the treatment of
allergies;
and 2) in diagnostic methods known to those of skill in the art (e.g., ELISA,
RIA,
IRMA, RAST, LIA, MAT) to determine patient allergic reactivity. Profilin to be
used
in these assays includes whole multimer profilin molecules (natural or
synthetic),
peptide fragments (natural or synthetic), or peptide fragments (synthetic neo-
antigens)
derived from the profilin structure that are either exposed for reaction upon
multimerization or appear uniquely through profilin-profilin interactions. The
proteins and peptides are either: a) acquired from plants or human tissues by
standard
purification methods (e.g., poly-1-proline affinity column purified profilin
shown in
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
12
FIGS. 1 and 2; or b) made by those skilled in the art using standard
commercially
available chemical synthesis; or c) recombinant DNA technology.
Profilin was purified from various natural sources using poly(1-proline)-
sepharose 4B affinity chromatography as previously described (Babich, et. al.,
1996;
Psaradellis, et. al., 2000; Janmey, 1991). Whether isolated directly from
cells of
interest, or synthesized, the profilin was purified away from all other
constituents by
pouring onto a 10 ml poly(1-proline)-sepharose 4B column. Actin and profilin
eluted
with 4M and 8M urea, respectively, were concentrated by centrifugation
(centriprep-
3, Amicon Inc., Beverly, MA). Profilin was initially washed in G-buffer (0.1
mM
CaCl2, 0.2 mM ATP, 0.5 mM DTT, 2 mM Tris-HCI, pH 7.2), concentrated (1-3
mg/ml) and stored in 2 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4)/0.1 mM CaCl2 at -20°C until
use. The
source of profilin may be through recombinant DNA technology (Psaradellis, et
al.,
2000; Sambrook and Russell, 2001), such as for corn pollen, profilin ZmPR01
described further under Materials and Methods (Expression and purification of
ZmPR01 profilin).
Screening patients for specific allergens is of diagnostic use in a clinical
setting. The proteins of the present invention are used to identify allergy
patients that
are sensitive to profilin and are used as hyposensitizing agents for patient
sero-
conversion. If a patient has IgE that recognizes profilin, then a
hyposensitization
reagent (i.e. "allergy shot") is developed from the present discovery whereby
the IgG
becomes the patient's primary immune response to produce clinical benefits
(i.e.,
clear the body of allergen without side effects associated with IgE).
The ELISA developed was subsequently used to measure Type 1 allergy
patient IgE recognition of ZmPROI profilin. There was one positive reactivity
to
profilin among patients with no known allergies (one of eight); minimal
reactivity in
those with miscellaneous (e.g., penicillin, fabric, dust) non-type-I allergies
(three of
14) and significant reactivity among those declaring type I allergies to
pollen (three of
six). The raw data from the three samples that gave a positive reaction to
profilin
(Table 2) showed a strong IgE reactivity to profilin with minimal background
(i. e. a
relatively high ratio of the optical densities when serum was added to
profilin-coated
wells vs. non-profilin- coated wells). The results agree with previous work
(Valenta,
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
13
et al., 1992; 1991, and 1995; Pauli 1996) that Type 1 allergy patients are
immunoreactive to plant profilin and indicate that the current approach will
be useful
to screen for patients with type I allergies.
The allergenic potential of profilin monomers and multimers was tested by
dot-filtration immunoblot analysis (FIG. 4). Although the ELISA is more
sensitive
and quantitative, the presence of reducing agents used to favor a monomeric
profilin
state (due to breaking of the sulphydryl inter-profilin bonds, but with
incomplete
effects as addressed earlier) would hinder the adsorption of profilin to
plastic wells.
Thus, a dot blot filtration apparatus was used to remove the reducing agents.
In all
instances, a greater response was measured from IgE recogiution of
+BME/profilin
(i.e. profilin as a predominantly multimeric form) compared with -
BME/profilin. In
contrast to the relatively wealc signal from negative control patients (i.e.
serum(-), IgE
From the positive serum category displayed a significantly greater recognition
of
profilin (regardless of ~ BME), thereby implicating higher profilin orders as
allergens.
Among the nine patients who declared Type 1 allergies to plant pollens, three
showed significant reactivity to ZmPR01 profilin with the developed ELISA.
Three
additional serum samples from the miscellaneous category (e.g. dust) also
yielded a
positive response. This might be expected, considering that many Type 1
allergy
patients often include dust as an allergen; furthermore, the identification of
profilin as
an IgE-binding component in latex (Vallier et al., 1995) raises the issue that
allergens
considered outside the conventional spectrum of type 1 candidates may indeed
be
recognized by Type 1 allergy patient IgE.
The relatively greater recognition of ZmPROl profilin multimers by IgE
reveals novel aspects of plant profilin as a proposed pan-allergen. Greater
recognition
of profilin multimers is not due to simple additive effects, because the same
amount
of total profilin was added to each well used in the dot-immunoblot
experiments.
Thus, it appears that profilin multimers act in synergy to either sterically
facilitate
access to binding sites or to present unique epitopes. It is likely that: (i)
more Type 1
allergy patients than previously estimated have IgE that recognize profilin;
and (ii)
profilin multimers are causative agents for Type 1 allergies.
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
14
Table 1 Enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay for human IgE reactivity
with ZmPR01 Profilin
ate o + Reaction - Reaction
Negative 1 7
Miscellaneous 3 11
Positive 3 6
Positive (+) or negative (-) reaction of profilin with serum samples from the
three patient categories (N = 30 samples; quadruplicate determinations for
each
point), Zm = Zea mays.
Table 2 Raw data from the Positive samples
Patient sam OD (xI0 1 of+ profiline Declared Allereies
In a no. coated wells
25 940/80 Hay Fever
74 630/340 Trees, pollen
90 214/12 masses, strawberries
Trees.
-
The ratio of optical densities (OD) from profilin-coated versus non-coated
wells for the three positive samples identified in Table 1 (mean OD shown;
standard
errors were within 10% of the mean).
Table 3:
Protein Isoform AccessionSequence
Api g4 (celery) Q9XF37 1 mswqayvddh Imcevegnpg qtltaaaiig
hdgsvwaqss
tfpqikpeei agimkdfdep
61 ghlaptglyl ggakymviqg epnavirgkk
gsggvtikkt
gqalvfgvyd epvtpgqcnv
121 iverlgdyli dqgl
Ara h5 (peanut) Q9SQI9 1 mswqtyvdnh Ilceiegdhl ssaailgqdg
gvwaqsshfp
qfkpeeitai mndfaepgsl
61 aptglylggt kymviqgepg aiipgkkgpg
gvtiektnqa
liigiydkpm tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylidtg I
Bet v2 (birch treeP25816 1 mswqtyvdeh Imcdidgqas nslasaivgh
pollen) dgsvwaqsss
fpqfkpqeit gimkdfeepg
61 hlaptglhlg gikymviqge agavirgkkg
sggitikktg
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
qalvfgiyee pvtpgqcnmv
121 verlgdylid qgl
Cyn d12 (bermuda 004725 1 mswqayvddh Imceieghhl tsaaiighdg
grass) tvwaqsaafp
afkpeemani mkdfdepgfl
61 aptglflgpt kymviqgepg avirgkkgsg
gvtvkktgqa
Ivigiydepm tpgqcnmvie
121 klgdylieqg m
Gly m3 (soybean) 065809 1 mswqayvddh Ilcdiegnhl thaaiigqdg
GmPR01 svwaqstdfp
qfkpeeitai mndfnepgsl
61 aptglylggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgpg
gvtvkktgaa
liigiydepm tpgqcnmvve
121 rpgdylidqg y
Gly m3 (soybean) 065810 1 mswqayvddh Ilcgiegnhl thaaiigqdg
GmPR011 svwlqstdfp
qfkpeeitai mndfnepgsl
61 aptglylggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgpg
gvtvkktgaa
liigiydepm tpgqcnmvve
121 rlgdylidqg y
Hel A2 (Sunflower)081982 1 mswqayvdeh Imcdiegtgq hltsaailgl
dgtvwaqsak
fpqfkpeemk giikefdeag
61 tlaptgmfia gakymvlqge pgavirgkkg
aggicikktg
qamimgiyde pvapgqcnmv
121 verlgdylle qgm
Hev b8 (latex) CAB51914 1 mswqayvddh Imceiegnhl saaaiigqdg
svwaqsanfp
qfkseeitgi msdfhepgtl
61 aptglyiggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgpg
gvtvkktnqa
liigiydepm tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylidqg y
Hev b8 (latex) 065812 1 mswqtyvder Imceiegnhl taaaiigqdg
Profilin I svwaqssnfp
qfkseeitai msdfdepgtl
61 aptglhlggt kymviqgeag avirgkkgpg
gvtvrktnqa
liigiydepm tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylleqg m
Hev b8 (latex) Q9STB6 1 mswqayvddh Imceiegnhl saaaiigqdg
Profilin II svwaqsanfp
qfkseeitgi msdfhepgtl
61 aptglyiggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgpg
gvtvkktnqa
liigiydepm tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylidqg y
Hev b8 (latex) Q9M7N0 1 mswqtyvdeh Imcdidghhl taaaiighdg
Profilin III ~ svwaqsssfp
qfkpeevaai mkdfdepgsl
61 aptglhlggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgsg
gitvkktgqa
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
16
liigiydepl tpgqcnmive~
121 rlgdylleqg m
Hev b8 (latex) Q9M7M9 1 mswqtyvddh Imcdidghrl taaaiighdg
Profilin IV svwaqsssfp
qfksdevaai mkdfdepgsl
61 aptglhlgst kymviqgepg avirgkkgsg
gitvkktsqa
liigiydepl tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylleqg m
Hev b8 (latex) Q9M7M8 1 mswqtyvddh Imcdidghrl taaaiighdg
Profilin V svwaqssgfp
qfksdevaav mkdfdepgsl
61 aptglhlggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgsg
gitvkktgqa
liigiydepl tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylleqg m
Hev b8 (latex) Q9LE18 1 mswqtyvddh Imcdidghrl taaaiighdg
Profilin VI svwaqsssfp
qfksdevaav mkdfdepgsl
61 aptglhlggt kymviqgepg avirgkkgsg
gitvkktgqa
liigiydepl tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylldqg I
Mer a1 (Mercurialis049894 1 mswqtyvddh Imcdidgqgq hlaaasivgh
Annua) dgsiwaqsas
fpqlkpeeit gimkdfdepg
61 hlaptglyia gtkymviqge sgavirgkkg
sggitikktg
qalvfgiyee pvtpgqcnmv
121 verlgdylie qgm
Ole e2 (olive P19963 1 mswqayvddh Imcdieghed hrltaaaivg
tree pollen) hdgsvwaqsa tfpqfkpeem ngimtdfnep
Profilin I
61 ghlaptglhl ggtkymviqg eagavirgkk
gsggitikkt
gqalvfgiye epvtpgqcnm
121 vverlgdylv eqgm
Ole e2 (olive 024170 1 mswqayvddh Imcdiegheg hrltaaaivg
tree pollen) hdgsvwaqsa tfpqfkpeem ngimtdfnep
Profilin II
61 ghlaptglhl ggtkymviqg eagavirgkk
gsggitikkt
gqalvfgiye epvtpgqcnm
121 vverlgdyll eqgl ,
Ole e2 (olive 024171 1 mswqayvddh Imcdiegheg hrltaaaivg
tree pollen) hdgsvwaqsa tfpqfkpeem ngimtdfnep
Profilin III
61 ghlaptglhl ggtkymviqg eagavirgkk
gsggitikkt
gqalvfgiye epvtpgqcnm
121 vaerlgdyll eqgl
Phl p11 (timothy P35079 1 mswqtyvdeh Imceieghhl asaailghdg
grass) tvwaqsadfp
Profilin I qfkpeeitgi mkdfdepghl
61 aptgmfvaga kymviqgepg rvirgkkgag
gitikktgqa
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
17
Ivvgiydepm tpgqcnmvve
121 rlgdylveqg m
Phl p11 (timothy 024650 1 mswqtyvdeh Imceieghhl asaailghdg
grass) tvwaqsadfp
Profilin II/IV qfkpeeitgi mkdfdepghl
61 aptgmfvaga kymviqgepg avirgkkgag
gitikkfgqa
Ivvgiydepm tpgqcnmvve
121 rlgdylveqg m
Phl p11 (timothy 024282 1 mswqtyvdeh Imceieghhl asaaifghdg
grass) tvwaqsadfp
Profilin III qfkpeeitgi mkdldepghl
61 aptgmfvaaa kymviqgepg avirgkkgag
gitikktgqa
Ivvgiydepm tpgqcnmvve
121 rlgdylveqg m
Pru av4 (sweet Q9XF39 1 mswqayvddh Imcdidgnrl taaailgqdg
cherry) svwsqsatfp
afkpeeiaai Ikdldqpgtl
61 aptglflggt kymviqgeag avirgkkgsg
gitvkktnqa
liigiydepl tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylieqg I
Pyr c4 (pear) 09XF38 1 mswqayvddh Imcdidghhl taaailghdg
svwaqsstfp
kfkpeeitai mkdfdepgsl
61 aptglhlggt kymviqgegg avirgkkgsg
gvtvkktsqa
Ivfgiyeepl tpgqcnmive
121 rlgdylidqg I
Zm PR01 (corn) P35081 1
ZmPRO !
mswqtyvdehlmceieghhltsaaivghdgatwaqstafpefkpeema
aimkdfdepghl
61 aptglilggtkymviqgepgavirgkkgsggitvkktgqs
liigiydepmtpgqcnlvve
121 rlgdylleqgm
Zm PR01 (corn) P35082 1 mswqayvdehlmceieghhlaaaaivghdgaawaqstafp
ZmPRO II
efktedmanimkdfdepghl
61
aptglflgptkymviqgepgavirgkkgsggitvkktgqalvvgiydepmtp
gqcnmvve
121 rlgdylleqgm
Zm PR01 (corn) P35083 1 mswqtyvdehlmceieghhlssaaivghdg
ZmPRO III avwaqstafp
qfkpeemtni ikdfdepgfl
61 apiglflgptkymviqgepg
avirgkkgsggitvkktgqalvigiydepmtpgqcnmvve
121 rlgdylveqgl
Zm PR01 (corn) 022655 1 mswqayvdehlmceiegqhlsaaaivghdgsvwaqsesfp
ZmPRO IV
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
18
elkpeevagiikdfdepgtl
61 aptglfvggtkymviqgepgvvirgkkgtggitikktgms
liigvydepmtpgqcnmvve
121 rlgdylieqgf
Zm PR01 (corn) Q9FR39 1 mswqayvddhllcdiegqhlsaaaivghdgsvwaqsenfp
ZmPRO V
elkpeevagmikdfdepgtl
61
aptglfvggtkymviqgepgvvirgkkgtggitikktgmsliigiydepmtpg
qcnmvve
121 rlgdylieqgf
Human Profilin P07737 1 magwnayidn Imadgtcqda aivgykdsps
I vwaavpgktf
vnitpaevgv Ivgkdrssfy
61 vngltlggqk csvirdsllq dgefsmdlrt
kstggaptfn
vtvtktdktl vllmgkegvh
121 gglinkkcye mashlrrsqy
Human Profilin NP 4442521 magwqsyvdn Imcdgccqea aivgycdaky
II Isoform a
vwaataggvf qsitpieidm ivgkdregff
61 tngltlgakk csvirdslyv dgdctmdirt
ksqggeptyn
vavgragrvl vfvmgkegvh
121 ggglnkkays makylrdsgf
Human Profilin NP 0026191 magwqsyvdn Imcdgccqea aivgycdaky
II Isoform b
vwaataggvf qsitpieidm ivgkdregff
61 fngltlgakk csvirdslyv dgdctmdirt
ksqggeptyn
vavgragral vivmgkegvh
121 ggtlnkkaye lalylrrsdv
EXAMPLES
Example 1: Production and Purification of Multimeric Profilin
The present invention relates the production and purification of recombinant
ZmPR01 profilin, which yields multimeric forms. The protein was subsequently
S identified to be immunologically distinct through western immunoblot
analysis and an
ELISA that was developed to assess allergy patient IgE reactivity. An apparent
tetrameric 60 kDa profilin was found in addition to higher multimeric orders
(> 97
kDa) that become amplified under non-reducing conditions. Although relatively
high
percentage acrylamide gels were used to visualize and study monomeric or lower
multimeric orders of ZmPR01 profilin, it appears that fastidious high profilin
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
19
multimers persist; that is, despite exposure to heat and reducing agents to
break up
multimers, the larger multimeric profilin forms remained prevalent. The
ability of
plant profilin to form multimers was examined to determine optimal molecular
forms
for hyposensitization. Purified recombinant protein encoded by the ZmPR01 cDNA
was visualized by silver-stained SDS-PAGE separation (FIGS. 1, 2a). A
predominant
band at 14.8 kDa was identified in transformed E. coli, particularly after
IPTG
(isopropyl beta-D-thiogalaclopyranoside) to induce protein production. Other
extraneous bands (> 30 kDa) presumably included multimeric profilin and/or
cellular
proteins that remain with the more convenient PLP (poly-1-proline) affinity
bead
slurry. ZmPR01 profilin separated by column chromatography yields a cleaner
preparation that was also studied under both reduced and non-reduced
conditions
(~'IG. 2a). A predominant band appeared as expected for monomeric ZmPR01 plant
profilin (approximately 14.8 kDa) but, consistent with reports for human
profilin,
higher molecular weight proteins such as higher multimeric profilin orders
remained
that were resistant to reducing agents. The band at approximately 60 kDa (FIG.
2a, +
BME) suggested the formation of a tetramer resistant to reducing agents, in
addition
to the distinct aggregation of proteins near the top of the gel (> 97 kDa).
The larger
proteins become more pronounced under non-reducing conditions (FIG 2a, - BME)
and are associated with a corresponding loss of monomeric profilin. The
presence of
stained proteins that remained in the stacking gel further supported the
fording of
natural protein (i.e. profilin) aggregation/multimerization. Any faint protein
represented at 14.8 kDa in the absence of reducing agent became more evident
on
development of corresponding immunoblots with sensitive substrates (FIG. 2b).
However, Western immunoblotting gave inconsistent positive identification for
the
higher molecular weight profilin multimers; presumably this was due to the
different
efficiencies in transfer of various protein sizes, alternations in net charge
that may
occur on protein-protein interactions (e.g. ionic bonds), difficulty for > 90
kDa
profilin multimers in migration from the stacking gel to the separating gel,
or a lack of
antibody recognition due to epitope masking when profilin
aggregates/multimerization occurs. Indeed, differences in the observed Western
immunoblot band intensities (monomer > tetramer » higher orders) support these
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
explanations. Collectively, the results suggest that immunologically distinct
Zea mays
profilin was produced, purified, and preferentially foams multimers.
Example 2: Evidence that Human Serum From Allergic Individuals Recgonizes
ZmPR01
5 An ELISA was developed to further immunologically identify the purified
recombinant protein and to provide a means to study whether human serum from
allergic individuals recognizes ZmPR01 profilin immunologically. Six
representative
control wells are shown (FIG. 4), of which only those coated with the purified
protein
elicited a significant colorimetric response. In addition, rabbit antihuman
profilin IgG
10 did not recognize ZmPR01 profilin, which is similar to the inability of
rabbit anti-
plaazt profilin IgG to recognize human profilin (Karakesisoglou et al., 1996).
Thus, a
method was established with a clear signal-to-noise ratio that was selective
for
ZmPR01 profilin and further verified the production of immunologically
distinct
plant profilin.
15 MATERIALS AND METHODS
Reagents
The cDNA encoding an isoform of profilin derived from the pollen of Zea
rnays (ZmPR0l;) (Staiger et al., 1993) was provided in a transfection vector
(pET23a; Novagen, Madison, WI, USA) with an isopropyl beta-D-
20 thiogalaclopyranoside (IPT G)-inducible promoter; polyclonal rabbit IgG
that
recognizes the protein product encoded by ZmPR01 cDNA was also provided.
Cyanogen bromide (CNBr)-activated sepharose 4B was purchased from Pharmacia
(Piscataway, NJ, USA) and poly(L-proline) (PLP; 10000-30000 MW) was purchased
from Sienna Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO, USA).
Horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated monoclonal antibodies (goat
antirabbit IgG, goat antihuman IgE) and silver staining kits were purchased
from
Pierce Chemical Co. (Roclcford, IL, USA).
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
21
Patient serum samples
Human serum samples from routine blood draws were obtained from the
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford, Office of Family
Practice
(Rockford, IL, USA) with appropriate patient consent; patient-declared
allergies were
amzotated on each serum container. Serum isolated from whole blood by standard
centrifugational methods was either stored at 4 C (and used within 1 week) or
aliquoted and stored at -20~C. The samples were categorized into one of three
groups:
(i) no declared allergies; (ii) miscellaneous reactions (i.e. non-plant
allergens, such as
dust, adhesive tape, synthetic materials and the like); or (iii) classical
Type I allergies
to plant pollens.
Expression and purification of ZmPR01 profilin
Pre-thawed competent BL21 (DE3) Esche~ichia coli cells (Novagen Inc.,
Madison, WI, USA) were transformed with ZmPROl/pET-23a by a modified
protocol from the manufacturer and essentially as described for plants
(Vrtala, et al,
1996; Susani, 1995; Karakesisoglou, 1996) and human profilins (Giesehnann et
al.,
1995). The DNA content and quality from lysates of various transformed E. coli
clones were analyzed by standard spectrophotometric measurement (i.e. 260 nm,
concentration; 260 nm/280 nm, relative nucleotide purity versus protein) and
argarose
(0.7%) gel electrophoresis. The E. coli clones expressing the highest
concentrations
of ZmPROl cDNA were selected for profilin production.
Transformed E. coli initially grown in 10 mL L-broth (in g/L: 10 tryptone, 5
bacto yeast extract, 10 NaCI + 0.15 ampicillin) at 37~C for 10 h were brought
to a
final 1 L volume of L-broth and incubated for an additional 2 h (37~C, gentle
mixing
at 100 r.p.m.) prior to the addition of either IPTG (0.4 mmol/L final
concentration) or
vehicle for an additional 6 h incubation. The cultures were centrifuged (1000
g for 30
min at 22~C) to yield pellets that were resuspended in 5 volumes of ice-cold
lysis
buffer (0.01% Triton X-100, 2 ~,mol/L leupeptin, 1 ~mol/L aprotinin, 0.2
~,mol/L
pepstatin, 5 mmol/L This-HCI, pH 7.2) and sonicated (continuous output control
setting 2 x 10 s, Sonifier cell disruptor, Branson Sonic Power Ca., Danbury,
CT,
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
22
a
USA). The lysates were centrifuged (12 000 g for 30 min at 4 C) and
supernatant
poured onto poly(L-proline)-sepharose 4B (i.e. PLP bead) affinity column, as
described previously (Babich et al., 1996; Janmey, 1991). Briefly, a step-wise
elution
gradient with urea was used to collect and purify profilin for overnight
dialysis (at
4 C) against 2 mmol/L N-2-hydroxyethylpiperazine-N'-2-ethanesulfonic acid
(HEPES), pH 7.2/0.1 mmol/L CaCl2 and concentration by centrifugation
(centriplus-
3, Amicon Inc., Beverly, MA, USA) to a final concentration of approximately 1
mg/mL, which was stored at-20 C. In some cases, ZmPR01 profilin was isolated
by
0
a co-incubation of E coli lyrate: PLP bead slurry (1:4 vol; 4-16 h at 4 C,
gentle
shaking), followed by centrifugation to pellet and wash the profilin-PLP bead
complexes (3 times with 100 mmol/L NaCI, 100 mmol/L glycine, 0.01 mmol/L DTT,
10 mmol/L Tris base, pH 7.8). The final pellet was suspended and boiled in
sample
buffer, with or without (3-mercaptoethanol (BME).
Proteins isolated by either PLP bead slurry (e.g. FIG. 1; initial purification
and
validation that profilin was made in E. coli) or column chromatography were
analyzed
by standard silver-stained sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis
(SDS-PAGE; 15% acrylamide) techniques. Profilin was fiuther characterized by
western immunoblotting, as previously described (Babich et al., 1996). The
immunoblot was developed by incubation with rabbit anti-ZmPR01 primary
antibody
(1:1000) and goat antirabbit secondary antibody conjugated with horseradish
peroxidase (1:500). Proteins were visualized with either a flourescent
substrate or
enhanced metal substrate (Super Signal or metal diaminobenzidine
tetrahydrochloride
(DAB), Pierce Chemical Co., Rockford, IL, USA).
Anti-~rofilin antibody development
Profilin antibodies were made against either recombinant or native profilin as
described (Babich, et al., 1996; Staiger et al., 1993). After affinity column
purification
and SDS-PAGE electroelution, the profilin was conjugated with adjuvant (RIBI
Immunochemical Research, Inc., Hamilton, MT) and inj ected iilto ten discrete
locations
(per RIBI protocol) into New Zealand V~hite rabbits. Rabbit serum anti-
profilin IgG was
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
23
purified by thiophilic adsorption chromatography (Pierce Chemical Co.,
Rockford, IL) to
yield an average peak fraction concentration of 4.5 mg IgG/ml. Anti-profilin
IgG
antibodies were screened on Western immunoblots containing antigen.
Enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay for human IgE-ZmPR01 ~rofilin
detection
Purified ZmPR01 product (50 ng%well) or a control vehicle [tris-buffered
saline (TBS), pH 7.4] was added to designated wells of a 96-well immunoassay
plate
(Immulon-2, Dynatech Laboratories Inc., Chantilly, VA, USA) that was stored
overnight at 4 C. The general sequence to develop the appropriate wells for
the
ELISA was as follows: (i) block non-specific sites (4% non-fat powdered milk,
0.1%
bovine serum albumin (BSA), 0.02% NaN3 in TBS, 20% SuperBlock from Peirce
Chemical Co. for 2 h at 4 C); (ii) 1 x TBS wash and incubate with either serum
samples or a control vehicle (TBS or heat-inactivated fetal calf serum;
overnight at
0
4 C); (iii) discard samples and add either TBS to sample wells or primary
rabbit IgG
antiplant profilin (1:1000 dilution in TBS, 0.01% Tween-20, 0.01% BSA for
1.5h)
into control wells to ensure ZmPR01 profilin coating; and (iv) 1 x TBS wash of
all
wells, add appropriate secondary antibodies (either goat antihuman IgE-HRP in
wells
that contained serum or goat antirabbit IgG-HRP in control wells; 1:500
dilutions for
2 h at 4 C). The plate was extensively washed then developed using 2,2'-azino-
bis (3-
ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) as a colorimetric method substrate
(although
other established HRP substrates were also successful in preliminary work) and
optical densities were measured with a microtiter platereader (~,S~Onm)~
Serial dilution
assay of prof lin standards indicated that the assay was linear between 0.1
and 100 ng
additions of profilin per well. Serum samples were considered reactive with
profilin
(i.e. positive) if there was at least one standard deviation difference
between the
optical densities obtained from the wells containing profilin versus those
without
profilin. Serum identified as positive gave a linear increase in signal
intensity of
concentrations between 10 and 100%.
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
24
Dot-filtration immunoblot
In some instances, a dot filtration immunoblot assay (Bio Rad, Hercules, CA,
USA) using supported nitrocellulose (0.2 ~m pore size) was a necessary
alternative to
the ELISA to determine the allergenic potential of ZrnPR01 monomers versus
multimers. Profilin was either placed under reducing (4.5% BME at 95 C for 3
min)
or non-reducing conditions (to favor monomeric or multimeric conditions,
respectively) and subsequently allowed to adhere to the dot immunoblot (50
ng/well
for 2 h) prior to vacuum filtration to remove the medium from the membrane.
The
BME was then removed by thorough washing with TBS and the dot immunoblot was
developed with antibodies similar to the ELISA method, but with an enhanced
metal
DAB as the HRP substrate. Quantitative values for the intensity of
immunorecognition (i.e. darkness) were obtained by computer scanning the
dotfiltration immunoblot and using Adobe Photoshop (Adobe systems, San Jose,
CA,
USA) software program (under histogram, black channel). The average brightness
value was obtained from the fixed number of pixels (486) that covered each dot
and
the corresponding darlmess value was calculated by 100 x the inverse of the
brightness (i.e. increased relative value represents increased darkness or
immunoreactivity). Comparisons between the means of different treatments were
made by Student's t-test (Sokal and Rohlf, 1981).
Methods of Administration to Hy~osensitize or Desensitize a Mammal
The present invention covers the use of profilin polypeptide allergens, e.g. a
fragment of multimer profilin, to hyposensitized or desensitize a mammal. Such
polypeptides can be administered to a mammal either alone or in combination
with
pharmaceutically acceptable carriers or diluents, in accordance with standard
pharmaceutical practice.
The method of hyposensitization involves, the successive parenteral, oral,
nasal, inhalant or rectal administration of incremental doses of profilin. The
term
parenteral as used herein includes subcutaneous, intravenous or intramuscular
inj ections.
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
A range from approximately 1 picogram to 10 milligrams per application dose
can be used as an "effective dose." However, the amount and number of
administrations sufficient to produce clinical effectiveness as measured by
reduced
IgE-related symptoms; diagnostic use or dosage is the amount which is
sufficient to
produce, or include in, a method to measure a reaction. The diluents and
carriers are
chosen by those spilled in the art according to commonly accepted clinical
procedures.
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
26
DOCUMENTS CITED
Astwood JD, et al., Nat. Biotech. 1996; 14; 1269-73.
Baalout S, Eur. J. Clin. them. Clin. Biochem. 1996; 34: 575-7.
Babich M., et al., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1996; 218: 125-31.
Carlsson L, et al., J. Mol. Biol. I976; 105: 353-66.
Gieselmann, et al., Eu~. J. Bioclzem. 1995; 229: 62I-8.
Goldschmidt-Clermont PJ, Janmey PA, Cell 1991; 66; 419-21.
Heiss S, et al., AlleYgy Clizz. Izzzznunol. 1996; 9B; 938-47.
Honore, B, et al., FEBS 1993; 330, 151-5.
Janmey PA, Meth. Enzymol. 1991; 196: 92-9.
Karakesisoglou, et al., Cell Mot. C'~loskel. 1996; 34; 36-47.
Kwiatkowski, DJ and Bruns, GAP, J. Biol. Claem. 1988; 263, 5910-5.
Lassing I, Lindberg U, NatuYe 1985; 314: 472-4.
Metzler et al., Protein Scieszce 1995; 4(3):450-9.
Mittermann I, et al., Sexual Plazzt Reprod. 1998; 11: 183-91.
Pauli G., et al., Allergy Clizz. Imznunol. 1996; 97: 1100-9.
Psaradellis, T. et al. Allergology Int. 2000; 49:27-35.
Sambrook J, Russell DW, Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, 3rd ed.,
2001.
Sohn RH, Goldschmidt-Clermont PJ, Bioessays 1994; 16: 165.72.
Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ, Biometzy, 2"d edn. San Francisco: WH Freeman; 1981.
Staiger CJ, et al., Plant J. 1993; 4: 631-41.
Susani M., Biochem. Biopl2ys. Res. Commuzz. 1995; 215: 250-63.
Theriot JA, Mitchison TJ, Cell 1993; 75; 835.8.
Valenta R., et al., Science I 1991; 253: 557-60.
Valenta R., Kraft D, Cuy~Y. Opin. Immunol. 1995; 7: 751-6.
Valenta R, et al., J. Biol. Chem. 1993; 268: 22 777-81.
Valenta R., et al., J. Exp. Med. 1992a; 175: 377-85.
Valenta R., et al., Int. Azrch. Allergy Inzzzzurzol. 1992b; 99: 271-3.
Vallier P, et al., Clin. Exp. Allergy 1995; 25: 332-9.
Vrtala S., et al., Bioclaem. Biophys. Res. Comnzun. 1996a; 226: 42-50.
Vrtala S. et al., JAlle>~gy Clizz. Immunol. 1996b; 98: 913-21.
Weldemann P, et al., J. Biol. Claem. 1996; 271: 29 915-21.
Wellhausen A, et al., Zeitschrift Eyn2ahYU>zgswissenschaft 1996; 35: 248-355.
CA 02439625 2003-08-28
WO 02/070005 PCT/US02/05911
27
U.S. Patent No. 5,583,046.
U.S. Patent No. 5,648,242.
